Res winter 14cropped

THERESOLVER

T H E Q UA RT E R LY M AG A Z I N E O F T H E C H A RT E R E D I N S T I T U T E O F A R B I T RAT O R S

Adjudication to be introduced in the Republic of Ireland Are mediators fit for purpose?

Legal round-up How to set up a chambers CIArb's Dispute Appointment Service Convention – in pictures www.ciarb.org

February 2014

Sir Peter Cresswell

How ethics in international arbitration can be made uniform

p01_cover.indd 1

17/01/2014 12:39

2014 14 13-14 March Marcch h 201 2 nds Sands Marina a Bay B S Sa an Convention Ce Conv nvention Centre Cen entre

Singapore S

Early-B Janua ird: Registe ry 201 4 to en r by 31 joy mo than 3 re 0% of f

CIArb-WIPO-SIAC O O--SIAC C Ar WIPO SIAC AC CIArb-WIPO Intellectual Property Inte Int ntellectual te Proppperty perrrt Me & Techn echnooology M Media Technology Sym Arb um rbitration bitratio Symposium Sympposium Arbitration

2014 20 014 Registration Open!

Re gistrat g ation Now at o Op pen! p Reg www.ciarb-wipo-siac-ipmtas2014.com For Fo or enquiries about o abou out IPMTAS ou IPMTA TAS 2014, 2014, email plea em please ema mail us at secretariat@ipmtas2014.com ma secreta tar ariat@ipmtas20 as 0 014.

4.com 0303 us at +65 6270 O Or calll us 6 627

RES.01.14.002.indd 1

14/01/2014 14:24

CONTACTS Redactive Publishing Ltd 17 Britton Street, London EC1M 5TP T: +44 (0)20 7880 6200 EDITORIAL T: +44 (0)20 7880 6200 E: editorial@ciarb.org Editor: Rima Evans Sub editor: Steve Smethurst Art editor: Adrian Taylor Picture editor: Claire Echavarry ADVERTISING Sales executive: James Condley T: +44 (0)20 7880 7661 E: james.condley@redactive.co.uk PUBLISHER Steve Grice E: steve.grice@redactive.co.uk PRODUCTION Production manager: Jane Easterman Senior production executive: Aysha Miah © THE RESOLVER is published on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) by Redactive Publishing Ltd (RPL), 17 Britton St, London EC1M 5TP. This magazine aims to include a broad range of opinion and professional issues and articles do not necessarily reflect the views of CIArb nor should such opinions be relied upon as statements of fact. All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced, transmitted or stored in any print or electronic format, including but not limited to any online service, any database or any part of the internet, or in any other format in whole or in part in any media whatsoever, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

While all due care is taken in writing and producing this magazine, neither CIArb nor RPL accept any liability for the accuracy of the contents or any opinions expressed herein. Printed by Gemini Press. ISSN 1743 8845 CIArb ENQUIRIES

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators 12 Bloomsbury Square, London WC1A 2LP, UK T: +44 (0)20 7421 7444 E: info@ciarb.org W: www.ciarb.org COURSES & QUALIFICATIONS T: +44 (0)20 7421 7439 E: education@ciarb.org DISPUTES APPOINTMENT SERVICE T: +44 (0)20 7421 7441 Waj Khan E: wkhan@ciarb.org Kam Nayee E: knayee@ciarb.org EVENTS T: +44 (0)20 7421 7441 Waj Khan E: wkhan@ciarb.org LEGAL SERVICES T: +44 (0)20 7421 7438 Sandra Greenaway E: sgreenaway@ciarb.org MEMBERSHIP T: +44 (0)20 7421 7490 Sue McLaughlin E: memberservices@ciarb.org

Michael Stephens

HAPPY NEW YEAR AND WELCOME TO THE FIRST ISSUE of The Resolver for 2014. I am tremendously honoured to be entrusted with the role of President. My predecessor, Vinayak Pradhan FCIArb C.Arb, was an outstanding ambassador for the Institute, working tirelessly to promote CIArb throughout the world and with great success. I thank him most sincerely on your behalf.

I also want to thank two others who have given significantly of their experience, time and wisdom to make enormous contributions to the continuing success of the Institute. John Wright FCIArb served as Chair of the Board of Trustees from 2010 to 2013 and Charles Brown FCIArb C.Arb was Chair of the Board of Management for 2012 and 2013. Both have been unstinting in their efforts for the Institute and we owe them our gratitude. Charles is Deputy President for 2014.

This issue, we are delighted that Sir Peter Cresswell FCIArb has written our cover feature on ethics in international arbitration (page 10). We also include a piece on whether mediators are fit for purpose (page 6).

The Institute is fast approaching the centenary of its foundation in 1915. Plans for celebrating this will be revealed over the coming months.

Meanwhile, there is much to anticipate this year: the Roebuck Lecture and Alexander Lecture will be held in London. We are adding to these with other lectures and seminars, details of which you will find at www.ciarb.org. Other significant gatherings will take place under the leadership of the European Branch (Warsaw in April), the Lebanon Branch (Beirut in May), the Kenyan Branch (Nairobi in August) and the UAE Branch (Dubai in November).

We have identified the golden thread that runs through CIArb’s activities to achieve and comply with our Charter: we seek to deliver education, training and qualifications; we want to enhance the Institute as a learned society; and we aim to facilitate all techniques of dispute resolution. You can be confident that the Board of Trustees, led by Dr Nayla Comair-Obeid FCIArb C.Arb, together with Director General Anthony Abrahams MCIArb and the whole Executive team as well as the Board of Management, now chaired by Wolf von Kumberg FCIArb, will work hard in support of those principles. I look forward to playing my part with them.

A new year often means new resolve and I have resolved to get on top of social media.

Be assured your President is but a tweet, a like and a link away from reaching all members throughout the world. May this be a healthy and successful year for you and those you hold dear.

Your President is but a tweet, a like and a link away

Michael Stephens FCIArb C.Arb President of CIArb

CONTENTS WATCH 4-5 News: Adjudication to commence in the Republic of Ireland; The DIFC falls into line with the New York Convention; Fall in numbers for family mediation in UK

9

MARKETING & SPONSORSHIP, T: +44 (0)20 7421 7441 Waj Khan E: wkhan@ciarb.org POLICY T: +44 (0)20 7421 7485 Chris Wilford E: cwilford@ciarb.org PR & COMMUNICATION T: +44 (0)20 7421 7473 Kim Regisford E: kregisford@ciarb.org RESEARCH & ACADEMIC AFFAIRS T: +44 (0)20 7421 7434 Julio Cesar Betancourt E: jbetancourt@ciarb.org DISCLAIMER: The contents of this publication are not intended to be a substitute for either general or specific legal advice on individual matters, and readers are strongly encouraged to seek competent legal advice.

Registered Charity N0− 803725

p03 contents.indd 3

LEADER

Law round-up: PGF II SA v OMFS Company 1 Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1288; Pioneer Cladding Ltd v John Graham Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 2954 (TCC)

REGULARS AND FEATURES 6

Are mediators fit for purpose?: Jane Gunn FCIArb outlines some of the

10

Cover: Sir Peter Cresswell, former Judge and Chairman of the Bar of England and Wales,

challenges facing the profession in a highly competitive marketplace

14 15 16 18

on achieving uniform ethics and professional standards in international arbitration How To… set up a chambers CIArb Branch news: Busy autumn schedule of events for members in East Asia; Joint seminar for the London Branch and the Adjudication Society CIArb’s DAS Convention: A photographic record of November’s event

What’s On: Round-up of upcoming training courses February 2014 | THERESOLVER

3

21/01/2014 09:40

321

WATCH

Days it takes Luxembourg to resolve a commercial dispute. The country was ranked number one for enforcing contracts in the Ease of Doing Business Index 2014

Green light for Irish adjudication

SHUTTERSTOCK

Adjudication is expected to commence in the Republic of Ireland in early 2014, following the passage of the 2013 Construction Contracts Act, signed into law by the Irish President at the end of last July.

The Act prohibits ‘pay when paid clauses’ so as to address cash-flow issues within the Irish construction industry. The construction sector contributed around €39 billion of economic activity at the height of the economic boom in Ireland. In 2012, during the recession, it was worth around €7.5 billion.

As a result of this legislative development, the Irish Branch of CIArb has taken a number of steps to promote adjudication and to make sure that education and training is provided in this area.

An ongoing adjudication conversion course is currently being held in Dublin, run by a number of domestic practitioners as well as London-based Chartered Arbitrator and adjudicator, Peter

Aeberli FCIArb C.Arb, in a bid to equip existing ADR practitioners to act as adjudicators. The final session will be run later this month.

Anthony Hussey FCIArb C.Arb, a Partner in construction law firm Hussey Fraser, said: “The main impetus for this legislation was the perception that domestic sub-contractors were being somewhat abused by some main contractors. It is anticipated that the implementation of this legislation will bring about a change of culture whereby there will be less disputes between main contractors and subcontractors as sub-contractors will be entitled as of right to prompt and regular payment.”

Hussey added: “The legislation has been welcomed by all areas of the industry and in particular the Construction Industry Federation which represents both main contractors and sub-contractors.”

• Report by Arran DowlingHussey FCIArb

ALAMY

Construction law paves the way

Irish construction contributed €39 billion to the economy at height of boom

DIFC falls into line with New York Convention

ICCA introduces new governance structure

Changes have been made to arbitration law in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) to bring it into line with the New York Convention.

DIFC Law No 6 of 2013 (Arbitration Law Amendment Law) was enacted on 15 December last year to make it clear that DIFC courts have the power to stay court proceedings in favour of a foreign seated arbitration.

According to Herbert Smith Freehills LLP, this is a welcome development and “brings clarity

The International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) has adopted a new constitution and bylaws which came into effect on 1 January 2014.

The ICCA’s Governing Board approved a new governance structure for the organisation in December, completing a process initiated four years ago at the ICCA Congress in Rio. The new constitution reaffirms ICCA’s core values, including its commitment to “promote knowledge about, and use of,

4

UAE: signed Convention in 2006

to an area of DIFC law where there was arguably an inconsistency with the UAE’s obligations under the New York Convention”.

The UAE has been a signatory to the New York Convention since 2006. DIFC passed its own arbitration law in 2008.

arbitration and other forms of international dispute resolution, to enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of such processes, and to harmonise best practices in international dispute settlement”.

It also confirms ICCA’s status as an independent, non-profit, non-governmental entity.

Supplementing the constitution are bylaws providing more detail regarding general membership, voting, the establishment of new committees, financial supervision, and the ICCA Foundation.

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p04_watch.indd 4

17/01/2014 14:32

17,000

The number of UK people who used legally aided mediation to settle family disputes in 2012 Source: UK MInistry of Justice

Family mediation hit by legal aid cuts There has been a dramatic fall in the number of publicly funded family mediation referrals in the UK since the government introduced legal aid cuts in April last year.

Despite the government’s mediation strategy being bolstered by extra funds, data shows that between April and September 2013 the number of divorcing couples attending mediation information and assessment meetings (MIAMs) fell by 51 per cent compared with the same period in the previous year.

MIAMs are introductory meetings where couples consider whether mediation might be more suitable for resolving their issues than court. The number of actual mediations was also down by a third year on year.

The fall in referrals has led to many mediation services and centres closing.

Dominic Raeside, Head of Mediation at Family Law in Partnership LLP in London explained that previously lawyers referred clients to MIAMs because they were required to do so in order to access legal aid funding.

“With legal aid gone for lawyers there is no now incentive for them to refer clients to meetings.

Instead, the courts are now full of litigants in person.”

Family mediation is still covered by legal aid. Last year, the government put an extra £10 million into the pot to support publicly funded mediation for divorcing couples.

“The irony is that this money isn’t being spent with referrals

REX

Compulsory mediation information and assessment meetings to come in

being so badly hit,” said Raeside.

He also explained that this has hit low-income families hardest since private mediations continue to do well.

“The middle classes are still coming through as private clients.

Those on a low income don’t know how to access mediation covered by legal aid since there is little information. The government just hasn’t through this through well enough. There has been a lack of co-ordination.”

Mediators are now hopeful that a proposed new law in the Children and Families Bill currently being considered by Parliament will improve the situation. The law will make MIAMs compulsory for most family disputes.

Family Justice Minister Simon Hughes (pictured) said: “When people separate we want them to do it in the least damaging way for everyone involved, especially children. That is why we want them to use the excellent mediation services available to agree a way forward, rather than have one forced upon them.”

The figures on MIAMs were obtained through a freedom of information request by mediator Marc Lopatin, founder of LawyerSupportedMediation.com

CIArb has welcomed Michael Stephens FCIArb C.Arb as its President for 2014 and Charles Brown FCIArb C.Arb as its new Deputy President.

There have also been changes to the Board of Management. Wolf von Kumberg FCIArb takes over as the new chairman with Bennar Balkaya MCIArb, Tim Hardy FCIArb, Chair of the Practice and Standards Committee and Rashda Rana FCIArb, Chair of the Education and Membership Committee also joining the board.

Meanwhile, Dr Nayla ComairObeid FCIArb C.Arb has become Chair of the Board of Trustees.

Von Kumberg and Stephens are both ex-officio members of the Board of Trustees.

For a full list of members of the boards and committees go to www.ciarb.org/about/whos-who

GETTY

CIArb welcomes new faces to its leadership team

The British Virgin Islands (BVI) has passed a new arbitration act. The Arbitration Act 2013 incorporates the UNCITRAL Model Law on arbitration (as amended at 7 July 2006) into British Virgin Islands domestic law (with certain minor modifications) and modernises the provisions for the enforcement of foreign arbitration awards in the British Virgin Islands.

It also contains provisions for the creation of a new statutory body, the BVI International Arbitration Centre. Formerly, arbitration in the British Virgin Islands was regulated under the Arbitration Act (Cap 6), a synthesis of the English Arbitration Acts of 1950 and 1975, reports international law firm Harneys. However, this legislation was “regarded as unsuitable for modern cross-border arbitration,” it said.

The British Virgin Islands House of Assembly passed the new Act in December. It is expected to come into force soon.

February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p05_watch.indd Sec1:5

5

17/01/2014 12:41

NEWS ANALYSIS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Are mediators rising to the challenge of a highly competitive market by ensuring quality?

Jane Gunn, a speaker at CIArb’s sixth Mediation Symposium, which considered whether mediators are fit for purpose, outlines key issues facing the profession

Are mediators bending too much to provide what lawyers want?

6

ISTOCK

W

What makes a mediator ‘fit for purpose’?

Why is the theme of mediators being fit for purpose such a hot topic?

Since mediation was introduced in the UK in the early 1990s it has grown in popularity and been accepted not only by the general public but the legal profession, the court system and, increasingly, commercial clients. This has been followed by an explosion in the number of training bodies with the result there are now a substantial number of trained and qualified mediators. There is a concern that not all of the mediators are of the same quality or have the same level of experience. So, how do you distinguish between a ‘good’ experienced mediator and a poor one? This is increasingly the challenge for clients and, of course, the profession.

What qualities does a good mediator have?

The ideal mediator is not egocentric but instead focused on everybody else in the mediation. There are a few problems around this though.

For example, mediators are encouraged to focus on settlement rates which isn’t what mediation should be about. It should be about what is best for the client, not the mediator.

Also, all of us as human

beings are tempted to try and manipulate a situation so that we achieve the outcome we think is best for us. This could be either through a settlement because it makes us feel and look good or by directing and driving the mediation towards what we think, in our mind, is a good settlement. However, as mediators we need to leave behind the desire to achieve a good outcome for ourselves or drive the mediation towards what we believe is a good settlement and allow the parties and lawyers between them to work it out.

There appears to be increasing tension between mediators and lawyers. Can you explain why?

I am not interested in overgeneralising or demonising lawyers which the mediation profession can sometimes be guilty of (I myself have trained and worked as a lawyer). But there is an issue around lawyers emerging as the ‘gatekeepers’ of mediator appointments and how this is influencing the development of the profession.

There has been some questioning of what lawyers look for from a mediator compared with what clients themselves might find beneficial. Are lawyers looking for a particular

kind of mediator, perhaps?

And, as a result, are mediators bending too much to provide what lawyers want despite it going against what they think is best?

To explain further, there is a spectrum along which mediators practise. This ranges from being more evaluative – and therefore making a judgment or decision – to being more facilitative by furthering the resolution of a problem by discovering needs and interests.

The other end of the spectrum offers a more client-focused type of mediation enabling the clients to discover a more positive way to interact and decide on their own outcome.

Most mediation training in the UK is facilitative in its style but many mediators are lawyers and experts in their field, former judges or QCs and lean towards a more evaluative style. This is unsurprising given that they are used to operating on a basis of right or wrong or who has the strongest or weakest case. They tend to be more directional when mediating, steering clients to where the case would have gone had it gone through court and therefore where it ought to settle.

This evaluative style is popular for many reasons.

For example, corporate clients trying to resolve a dispute

THERESOLVER | February November2014 2010

p06-08_newsanalysis.indd 6

20/01/2014 12:09

and reporting back to their board find it reassuring since the responsibility is taken away from them when a mediator is able to give a steer on a sensible resolution.

However, it has its weaknesses too. There are often many hidden issues in a mediation – what people say the dispute is about isn’t necessarily what it’s really about. And there can be latent opportunities to resolve a dispute that are missed if you are only looking at it from the perspective of what the courts would have decided.

Quite often in a mediation the legal issues presented at the beginning drop away and people end up talking much more about what they think or feel or what they really need. This is different to what they could legally claim and might be overlooked in a more evaluative approach.

The tension has emerged since lawyers, who do much of the hiring, tend to be drawn to mediators with legal or subject matter expertise while largely ignoring skills of non-expert and even non-lawyer mediators who can often be more effective because they put the needs of the client at the very centre of the process rather than their own knowledge and experience.

So non-expert and non-lawyer mediators are having a tougher

top mediators that are extremely busy and well paid, followed by a set that get a fair amount of work. But below that, there is a whole swathe of trained people that haven’t enough work to be full-time mediators and who only get occasional experience. Because mediation hasn’t grown quite as rapidly as predicted the market is currently very competitive which is a problem. However, mediators do have some control over this.

time getting work.

Ultimately, of course, lawyers and their clients just need to be aware of the different shades and types of mediator that are available to them.

And I should add that an evaluative approach is not favoured by lawyers alone.

I think that anybody who is naturally a problem solver in their professional life is drawn to this approach.

What other challenges face the profession?

There are thousands of people in the UK now trained as mediators, but the majority do not get enough opportunity to practise. There are a handful of

One thing that can be overlooked when people come forward for mediation training is that being successful and effective is not just about having a passion for the discipline – they also require marketing skill. Mediation is, after all, a self-employed profession similar to barristers.

As a mediator you need to create a brand and reputation for yourself that few people are equipped to do and do it well.

Establishing a small business can be complex and involves social networking, blogging, February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p06-08_newsanalysis.indd 7

7

17/01/2014 12:42

NEWS ANALYSIS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT creating a website, building contacts and so forth. This in itself can generate quite a lot of extra workload especially for someone still working in their primary profession.

But it is essential – there has to be an expectation that you find your own niche and your own work. I would advise that mediators don’t give up their day job until they have built up their experience and knowledge and understood how they are going to carve a niche for themselves and market themselves. It is advice I followed when I started out in mediation.

Other concerning issues are around there still being very few full-time women mediators. We need greater diversity. What can also work well in more complex cases is co-mediation, which provides an opportunity for male and female mediators to work together.

Are mediators being rigorous about personal development?

Most mediators are fit for purpose but there is another level that we could now take the mediation profession to and that is the higher level of mastery.

There are three levels at which mediators develop. The first is to learn technique: basic skills such as open questioning, active listening, prioritising issues or helping the parties generate options.

The next level is to learn the context into which those skills are put into practice and working towards a deeper understanding of what we do and how we do it so we can become more effective.

For example, how and when we should ask certain types of questions, or how and when to listen or empathise. This is all gained through actual experience of mediation.

But the third level of development is about the mediator learning about themselves as a mediator – it is the most challenging frontier of 8

therefore a great opportunity for mediation to be used at a much earlier stage. I have always had a huge vision for it.

Over the past 10 years some case law has encouraged lawyers to direct their clients to mediation with cost penalties if they don’t.

ADS Aerospace Limited v EMS Global Tracking Limited was one example. This has effectively raised the profile of mediation.

I also believe there is further opportunity for mediators to work directly with commercial clients rather than through lawyers. That is not to exclude lawyers,

There is a real need to educate people about the opportunities and benefits that mediation presents development. It is about achieving ‘mastery,’ becoming a master mediator so an individual can be aware of and understand their own strengths and weaknesses and the personal qualities that might influence the mediation process. For example, when they might be tempted to be directional or put their own ego first.

It is at this stage that mediators begin to focus on and take responsibility for their own personal development. It is also at this stage that mediation becomes much more about being a mediator rather than simply doing mediation by performing prescribed steps as dictated by a particular mediation school or theory.

Very few mediators are operating at level three – even some of the top-earning mediators are not. After all, it is hard to let go of all of your own expectations, judgments or assumptions about people and simply facilitate the mediation as it unfolds. As a result, it is a self-development

trait that needs to be further developed by the profession.

There is a conundrum though.

While I advocate that mediators need to become master mediators, how we identify that mastery or create criteria for it that a mediation hirer could evaluate is difficult. This needs to be looked at.

Nevertheless it would be good to believe that those mediators who achieve mastery would be the first choice for lawyers and clients. Yet experience shows that the hiring process is much more subjective and can be down to personal experience or recommendation.

There is a need to educate users so that the best are recognised and mastery prevails.

Do you think mediation will keep building in momentum? How is its role increasing in scope?

From the moment a conflict begins to the moment it escalates into a dispute there is an opportunity for resolution and

but there are many opportunities in the commercial world and all sorts of circumstances where mediation skills could be used to great advantage to save money and heartache.

However, there is still a real need to educate people about the opportunities and benefits that mediation presents. It really fits into every sector where people are relating to each other.

It is an invaluable tool for all levels of society in making sense of all their relationships.

What is really important is that all users of mediation have a better understanding of what makes a mediator ‘fit for purpose’. Also, that all users of mediation, including the lawyers who choose mediators on behalf of their clients, are better informed so that excellence can be recognised.

Jane Gunn FCIArb is a former City solicitor and now a full time mediator with more than 17 years’ experience of mediating commercial cases.

She is the author of How to Beat Bedlam in the Boardroom and Boredom in the Bedroom.

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p06-08_newsanalysis.indd 8

17/01/2014 12:42

LAW

An overview of recent key court cases

ROUND-UP UNREASONABLE REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION: IS SILENCE REALLY GOLDEN?

THE CASE ○ MEDIATION

PGF II SA v OMFS Company 1 Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 1288

PGF WAS THE FREEHOLD OWNER OF AN OFFICE BUILDING. OMFS took an assignment of leases of a number of floors of PGF’s building. A dispute arose between the parties, which resulted in PGF alleging breaches of OMFS’s repairing covenants and issuing proceedings in the Chancery Division, claiming just over £1.9 million.

OMFS denied liability. PGF made an initial Part 36 offer of £1.25 million followed by a second offer, some nine months later, of £1.25 million plus interest. At the same time, by a separate letter, PGF invited OMFS to take part in mediation. Also at that time, OMFS sent PGF a Part 36 offer of £700,000 (inclusive of interest). Neither of the competing Part 36 offers was accepted and PGF’s invitation to mediate received no response from OMFS. A further invitation by PGF to OMFS to engage in mediation also failed to elicit a response. The failure to reply, however, was not raised before the court. Six months later, PGF made a further Part 36 offer to accept £1.05 million plus interest, thereby narrowing the gap considerably between the parties’ offers. The day before trial (and in the light of information brought to its attention for the first time) PGF accepted OMFS’s £700,000 offer thus settling the case save as to costs. PGF applied for a cost sanction, alleging that OMFS had unreasonably refused to mediate. The High Court acceded in part to PGF’s application for costs sanctions on the grounds that OMFS had unreasonably refused to mediate by depriving it of the costs to which it would otherwise have been entitled under Part 36, but

declined to take the further step of making OMFS pay PGF’s costs incurred during the same period.

Both parties appealed. ○ THE JUDGMENT

The Court of Appeal, referring to the Jackson ADR Handbook (OUP 2013) and the principles and guidelines set out in Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004], decided that silence in the face of an invitation to participate in ADR amounted to an unreasonable refusal. Briggs LJ held that OMFS’s silence in the face of two requests to mediate was, therefore, sufficient to warrant a costs sanction. He also held that judges have a wide discretion as to the form of cost orders to be made in substitution for the prescribed consequences.

As a result, both appeal and cross appeal were dismissed. ○ WHAT IT MEANS

Parties are encouraged to participate in ADR, even if they have reasons which might justify a refusal, or the undertaking of some other ADR mechanism, or the timing at which it might be more appropriate to make use of it.

The full judgment is available at:

→ www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/ Civ/2013/1288.html

PGF applied for a cost sanction, alleging that OMFS had unreasonably refused to mediate

A NOVEL POINT AS TO THE GRANT OF STAYS OF EXECUTION

THE CASE ○ ADJUDICATION

Pioneer Cladding Ltd v John Graham Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 2954 (TCC)

GRAHAM INSTRUCTED PIONEER TO CARRY OUT THE cladding and curtain walling sub-contract works at a site in South Shields. The sub-contract incorporated Graham’s standard terms and conditions.

Various issues arose between the parties, which led Pioneer to refer two disputes under the sub-contract to two separate adjudications. The decision in relation to the cladding sub-contract was that Pioneer was entitled to £222,394.20 plus interest. The decision pursuant to the curtain walling element of the sub-contract was that Pioneer had been overpaid by £29,388.67. Thus, there was a net sum due to Pioneer pursuant to the adjudicator’s decision in the sum of £193,005.53.

Because Graham had paid some of the adjudicator’s fees on behalf of Pioneer, the parties agreed that the sum of £4,340.04 must be deducted from the £193,005.53, making a net sum due of £188,665.49. The matter was subsequently referred to arbitration. In the intervening period, Pioneer sought to enforce the adjudicator’s decision by way of summary judgment and Graham applied for a stay of execution. Both counsel referred to Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Ltd v Derek Vago [2005]. In deciding the matter, the High Court raised the following questions: was it probable that Pioneer would be unable to repay the £188,665.49 if that was the outcome of the ongoing arbitration? Was Pioneer’s financial position the same or similar to the financial position of which Graham was aware at the time the contract was made? And, was Pioneer’s financial position due either wholly or in significant part

to Graham’s failure to pay the sums awarded by the adjudicator? ○ THE JUDGMENT

The High Court decided that if this money was paid to Pioneer, it would not be in a position to repay it if the arbitration subsequently went against them. It also held that Graham entered into that subcontract on a false premise. The Court found that Pioneer never had sufficient cash reserves to run the business properly. It also found that Pioneer’s financial difficulties were not caused or substantially contributed to by Graham.

Notwithstanding the principles set out in Wimbledon v Vago, Mr Justice Coulson exercised his discretion against Pioneer and, despite having given judgment in the sum of £188,665.49 in its favour, he stayed the execution of that judgment

pending the outcome of the ongoing arbitration. ○ WHAT IT MEANS

This case concerns an application to the court to stay the execution of a summary judgment arising out of an adjudicator’s decision pending arbitration proceedings.

The full judgment is available at:

→ www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/ TCC/2013/2954.html Both reports by Julio César Betancourt MCIArb, Head of Research and Academic Affairs and Velia Soames Director of Legal Services at CIArb.

,

The court held that Graham entered into that sub-contract on a false premise

February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p9_Law.indd 9

9

17/01/2014 12:43

ETHICS INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION The goal of uniform ethics and core professional standards in international arbitration will serve to enhance an already vibrant form of dispute resolution. But how can this be achieved?

Enhancing standards Article: Sir Peter Cresswell Photography: Peter Searle USINESS IS increasingly global and cross border. It is obviously attractive to businessmen to provide for settlement of disputes in a neutral venue with independent arbitrators with relevant expertise, applying a system of law that is certain and respected. International arbitration should grow in tandem with the globalisation of trade.

The current debate about ethics or professional standards in international arbitration should be seen in the context of the need to promote the use of international arbitration as a means of resolving transnational disputes and to improve its effectiveness.

As the reach of international arbitration is extended throughout the world there may be those involved in arbitrations less familiar with the professional standards that are generally regarded as norms. But this is not a reason for halting the use and development of international arbitration. The approach should not be to advise against arbitration of disputes involving arbitrators, counsel or parties from country X. In practical terms, the approach should be to engage with country X and to explain to practitioners what are regarded as necessary professional standards in arbitration. There is a need to educate new 10

entrants as to the professional standards that are generally regarded as norms, and at the same time to do more towards the goal of identifying and codifying core professional standards which are then applied uniformly.

In my opinion, a balanced approach between promoting and improving the effectiveness of international arbitration on the one hand, and ensuring appropriate professional standards on the other, is as follows below.

Promotion of the use of international arbitration All members of the international arbitration community should play a part in promoting the use of international arbitration as a means of resolving transnational disputes and improving its effectiveness.

No arbitrator is so eminent that parties should wait more than three months for an award

The tribunal – principles of independence and impartiality The principles of arbitrator independence and impartiality are accepted universally and there can never be any compromise in respect of these. Article 12 of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides that an arbitrator shall disclose “any circumstances likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to [their] impartiality or independence”. This obligation continues throughout the arbitral proceedings.

But an arbitrator may only be challenged “if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to [their] impartiality or independence…”

Delay in awards The professional standards that apply to international arbitrators are not confined to principles of independence and impartiality.

The leading arbitrators should set standards by example. No arbitrator is so eminent that parties should have to wait for more than three months for an award. Lord Bingham (the role model for many of the current generation of English arbitrators) could not have had a heavier burden of cases. But he always produced a judgment within three months of a hearing. The longer an award is left, the more the effect of the evidence and

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p10_13 cover feature.indd 10

17/01/2014 12:43

February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p10_13 cover feature.indd 11

11

17/01/2014 12:43

ETHICS INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION submissions fades. According to the 2012 Berwin Leighton Paisner report, Perceived Delay in the Arbitration Process, 66 per cent of respondents indicated that they had at some time within the past five years felt dissatisfied about the time they had to wait for an award. I entirely agree with the 85 per cent of respondents who felt that rewarding the tribunal for producing its award expeditiously should not be necessary. Arbitrators, when giving directions as to the timetable, should include a deadline for the delivery of the award. This should be no longer than (and preferably shorter than) the time (a maximum of three months) in which a court judgment would be delivered. This will only happen if arbitral institutions obtain an undertaking from arbitrators to reserve the necessary award writing time after a hearing ends.

Counsel subject to different and possibly conflicting professional rules Lawyers appearing for parties in an international arbitration may be subject to home bar rules that differ from those that apply to their opponent and also to the rules of the seat (which may differ from the two sets of home bar rules). There may be material differences between these various rules for example as to (a) the evidence necessary before a plea of fraud can properly be advanced; (b) the extent to which contact with witnesses is permitted; (c) the extent of any duty to search for documents subject to an order for production; and; (d) whether there is a duty to cite decided cases material to the issues. It has been suggested that there should be a uniform binding code of ethics incorporated into the rules of major arbitral institutions and that a level playing field requires local bars to work together to produce such a code of ethics for international arbitration. Despite the success of the New York Convention and the Model Law, such a uniform binding code is unlikely in the short term. There is a need to focus on what, in practice, can be achieved in the short and medium term, in the expectation that uniformity or near uniformity may be achieved in the long term.

The contribution of rules and guidelines The publication of rules and guidelines by institutions and bar associations, which are widely accepted by the arbitration community, is a major contribution to the development and maintenance of standards.

12

An expert witness has exactly the same role, duties and responsibilities in an arbitration as in court The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration, the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration and the IBA Guidelines on Party Representation in International Arbitration are all significant contributions to the development and maintenance of standards.

The rules and guidelines updated (as they are) on a regular basis in the light of experience of new issues and problems, become more authoritative and more widely accepted with each revision (particularly if the revision is arrived at after the widest consultation).

The IBA Guidelines on Conflicts and Party Representation are not intended to displace applicable mandatory laws, professional or disciplinary rules or agreed arbitration rules that may be relevant or applicable. The parties to an arbitration may adopt the Guidelines or parts thereof by agreement.

Arbitral tribunals may apply the Guidelines at their discretion, subject to any applicable mandatory rules, if they determine that they have authority to do so. In an appropriate case (and this will not always be necessary) a tribunal should consider inviting the parties to agree – at or before the first casemanagement conference – that the arbitration should be subject to particular institutional or bar association rules or guidelines.

Further, it is always open to counsel to raise with the tribunal any concerns that they may have as to how, for example, a search for documents subject to a production order or contact with witnesses, should be handled.

There is another safeguard. Any experienced international arbitrator will, in addition to studying the documents and listening carefully to the evidence, observe the approach and conduct of counsel. It is elementary advocacy that an advocate should try and command the attention and respect of the tribunal. It is counterproductive for an advocate to behave in a manner contrary to what a tribunal may reasonably expect.

Conflicts and challenges The non-waivable and waivable Red Lists and Orange and Green Lists in the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts have had, and will continue to have, an important practical influence in providing guidance to arbitrators, counsel, parties, institutions and indeed courts as to what situations do and do not constitute conflicts of interest and as to what should be disclosed. There is a need to adapt to changing times. As a former Chairman of the Bar of England and Wales, I consider that the English Bar must (as it always has in the past) adapt.

The international view is that it is undesirable in an arbitration to have an arbitrator and an advocate from the same chambers. More generally, the fact that the LCIA’s Arbitration International published a special edition on arbitrator challenges reflects a worrying trend towards an increased number of challenges.

At the same time it is a reminder to arbitrators as to how circumspect they must be. The publication of reasoned decisions by institutions in response to challenges is, on balance, likely to promote the use and development of international arbitration.

The LCIA’s decision in 2006 to publish such decisions was right in principle. Other institutions (to the extent that they do not already do so), should follow suit.

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p10_13 cover feature.indd 12

17/01/2014 12:43

production in Europe and the wider approach in the United States. In most arbitrations the parties are able to manage production without help from the tribunal, but where there is difficulty there is no substitute for the tribunal managing production by way of precise directions, focusing on the issues in the case and relevance and materiality.

Expert witnesses

Party representation The IBA Rules on Party Representation are an important step forward. They cover party representation, communications with arbitrators, submissions to the tribunal, information exchange and production, witnesses and experts and remedies for misconduct.

Production It is important to maintain the distinction between production of documents in arbitration and discovery or disclosure of documents in litigation. If this distinction is not maintained, one of the key advantages of arbitration will be lost. This is particularly important today when documents are held electronically. Under the ICC Rules issues as to whether and how much production of paper or electronic documents will occur are left up to the parties and the arbitrators.

The IBA Rules of Evidence provide for the production by each party of all documents on which it intends to rely and for a party’s right to request the production of a specifically identified document or a narrow and specific category of documents that are relevant and material. In my opinion, the ICC report Managing E-Document Production although helpful, inevitably involved a compromise between the narrower approach to

In the case “the Ikarian Reefer” [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 68, I set out the role of the expert witness and the principles that govern expert evidence. Although there are marked differences between the practice and procedure in arbitrations and in court proceedings (and rightly so), in my opinion an expert witness has exactly the same role, duties and responsibilities in an arbitration as in court proceedings.

It is the duty of an expert to help the arbitral tribunal on the matters within their expertise. This duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom they have received instructions or by whom they are paid.

Expert evidence should be the independent product of the expert uninfluenced by the pressures of arbitration. An expert should assist the tribunal by providing objective, unbiased opinion on matters within their expertise and they should not assume the role of an advocate.

The expert must consider all material facts, including those which might detract from their opinion. An expert should make it clear when a question or issue falls outside their expertise and when they are not able to reach a definite opinion, for example because of insufficient information. If, after producing a report, an expert changes their view on any material matter, such change of view should be communicated to all the parties without delay and when appropriate to the tribunal.

Where there are two respectable schools of opinion, an expert, when preparing their opinion for a tribunal, should make this clear. Where an addition or qualification is required in order to present a complete and balanced opinion, an expert should make the addition or qualification when preparing their opinion for a tribunal. The full and accurate answer to a question or issue put to an expert witness is not necessarily black and white.

The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration reflect these principles for party-appointed experts (Article 5) and tribunal-appointed experts (Article 6). In the case of party-appointed

experts, the expert report must contain a statement of independence from the parties, their advisors and the tribunal; a statement of the facts on which the opinion is based; the expert’s opinions and conclusions, including a description of the methods, evidence and information used in arriving at the conclusions; and an affirmation of belief in the opinions expressed.

Again, when this is necessary, tribunals should give directions as to the preparation of expert evidence.

CIArb All members are contractually bound to comply with the constitutional terms of the Institute’s Royal Charter and Bye-Laws. A significant breach is misconduct. Members who fall significantly below the standards set out in the code are open to complaint by members of the public or users and thus potentially subject to investigation by the Professional Conduct Committee.

It follows that an arbitrator or advocate who is a lawyer or accountant and also a member of CIArb is subject to two codes that afford protection to users – the professional code of the lawyer or accountant and the CIArb professional code. The significance of CIArb membership deserves wider recognition internationally.

To conclude, it is a privilege to be an arbitrator or counsel in an arbitration. The role of an arbitrator and counsel is a professional role not a business one. All members of the international arbitration community should play a part in promoting the use of international arbitration as a means of resolving transnational disputes. The institutions, bar associations and others that identify, develop and codify core professional standards play an important part in ensuring that international arbitration grows in tandem with the globalisation of trade. There is more that can and should be done towards the goal of uniform professional standards, but international arbitration far from being broken, is in a vibrant stage of development.

Sir Peter Cresswell FCIArb has more than 40 years’ experience of dispute resolution as Barrister, QC, Chairman of the Bar and Judge. He was responsible (as Judge in charge of the Commercial Court in 1993/4) for the first and pioneering Practice Direction which encouraged litigants to consider mediation as an alternative to litigation. He was also Judge in charge of the Lloyd’s Litigation (the largest piece of civil litigation in the UK). He retired in 2008 and is now an arbitrator and mediator.

THERESOLVER

February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p10_13 cover feature.indd 13

13

17/01/2014 12:44

HOW TO…

…set up a chambers

By Tony Marks Illustration: Cameron Law “You need to decide on the business areas in which the chambers will practise”

Y MORE INFO Looking to appoint an arbitrator?

CIArb-Das can help you find a suitably qualified arbitrator with the right knowledge and experience. For any enquiries please contact Waj Khan. T: +44 (0) 207 421 7444.

Email wkhan@ciarb.org

Tony Marks FCIArb is an arbitrator and mediator and founded ArbDB Chambers, the Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Board Chambers (www. arbdb.com) with John Wright FCIArb and Michael Cover FCIArb in 2011.

ArbDB has nine members.

14

YOU ARE AN INDEPENDENT arbitrator, mediator or adjudicator, operating as a sole trader. You are in contact with a number of other independent neutrals. After discussions with them you see that working collectively as a chambers may improve or enhance your position in the market place.

So, just how do you go about creating a chambers of dispute resolvers?

1 ⁄

Decide on your market and members

At the outset you need to decide on the business areas in which the chambers will practise. Will you aim to market chambers’ services in one or two related areas such as construction, engineering and property or will you try to develop a broader range of areas? Depending on the markets you are aiming for, a decision needs to be made about the professional disciplines of the members and their expertise as dispute resolvers, for example, all adjudicators or possibly a mix of mediators, arbitrators and adjudicators.

It may seem obvious but you need to decide on the number of members you wish to have – too large a number and it becomes more like a panel; too small and you do not create a presence in the market place.

2 ⁄

Set up a corporate structure and constitution You will need a structure. This may be a limited company with the founders holding the shares or shares may be held by the members. It is advisable to have a small executive team to make the day-to-day decisions.

To regulate how the chambers operates, it needs a constitution.

This may be based on barristers’ chambers’ constitutions where the members are all sole practitioners but bear expenses in agreed proportions. The chambers will need its own bank accounts one of which should be a deposit account.

3 ⁄

Funding the business

As with any new business, it will require start up capital.

The shareholders could provide capital by way of loans.

Alternatively the chambers’ members could pay a one-off membership fee. Annual running costs of chambers (including the commission of the clerk) may be funded by way of a percentage deduction from the fees earned by the members.

The percentage will be decided through an annual budget.

The percentage may range anywhere from 15-25 per cent

depending on the level of the chambers’ running costs.

4 ⁄

Website and premises

A website is crucial for obvious reasons. You will need to appoint a good website designer preferably with some experience in this field. Members will need to supply full CVs. Each member should have their own chambers email address. The chambers will need a postal address too, but as members will, for the most part, be able to work from their own premises, you should think carefully before committing to leasing offices for chambers.

5 ⁄

Appoint a clerk or manager

Last, but not least, it is essential to appoint a chambers’ clerk.

The clerk will be the main point of contact with the solicitors and others wishing to appoint a member of chambers as a neutral.

The clerk will need a good knowledge of the marketplace and experience of negotiating fees. Collection of fees is also a vital part of this role. It would be useful for the clerk to undertake some marketing on behalf of the chambers. Remuneration can be by way of commission based on turnover, possibly with a basic retainer.

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p14 How to Chambers.indd Sec1:14

17/01/2014 12:44

CIArb NEWS BRANCH ROUND-UP EAST ASIA

Busy conclusion to 2013 for East Asia On 10 September last year, Sara Masters QC of 20 Essex Street Chambers in London gave an evening talk at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre.

Her subject was: “Interim Measures – Court v Arbitrator?

The decision of the UKSC in Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC v AES Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant LLP”.

On 13 September, with the support of Fangda Partners, EAB and the China Young Arbitration Group jointly held a round-table discussion at the Beijing office of Fangda. Gary Born, Partner at WilmerHale and Chair of the firm’s international arbitration practice group, was keynote speaker.

Teresa Cheng SC, FCIArb Vice Chair of Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, was also invited to attend the discussion.

In October, Man Sing Yeung FCIArb C.Arb and Christopher To FCIArb, respectively the Branch Chair and the Vice Chair attended a

LONDON, UK

Full capacity In October, a joint seminar of the London Branch and the Adjudication Society heard construction barrister Crispin Winser FCIArb and Berrymans Lace Mawer (BLM) Partner Robert Stevenson FCIArb C.Arb speak on the topic: “Set off and the jurisdiction of arbitrators and adjudicators”. A capacity attendance received generous hospitality from BLM. On 20 November, the London Branch held its second seminar on arbitration in Africa titled: “Trends in Arbitration in Africa”.

Eversheds LLP kindly hosted the seminar, which was chaired by Ike Ehiribe FCIArb C.Arb. The speakers were Mahnaz Malik, a barrister at 20 Essex

Speakers at the Taipei seminar: (from left) Shilin Huang ACIArb, Helena Chen FCIArb, Houchih Kuo, Lok Vi Ming and Chan Hock Keng FCIArb

roundtable meeting on IP Arbitration and Mediation.

A working group on IP trading, chaired by the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, was set up in March 2013 to advise on the overall strategies to promote the

development of Hong Kong as an IP trading hub and to identify policy and other support measures to facilitate IP trading in Hong Kong.

A roundtable meeting had been held to engage relevant stakeholders to gather and

Street, Dr Emilia Onyema FCIArb, a senior lecturer in International Commercial Law at SOAS University of London and Dr Stuart Dutson MCIArb, a Partner at Eversheds LLP. The branch also held an Annual Dinner. Hosting the occasion at the Armourers’ Hall in the City, Branch Chair Margaret BickfordSmith QC MCIArb mentioned highlights of the branch’s year, and welcomed the then CIArb President Vinayak Pradhan FCIArb C.Arb and Director General Anthony Abrahams MCIArb. Guest speaker was Sir Christopher Clarke, a Court of Appeal judge.

Dr Al Jarratt MCIArb, ran a workshop at CIArb’s sixth Annual Mediation Symposium in London in October, hosted by Linklaters. The workshop covered two areas: the principles of mediation and a discussion of two recently conducted international mediations in Doha, Qatar and Dubai.

The first topic focused on providing the appropriate mechanism to steer the mediation process to a settlement.

The discussion then moved to considering two disputes which were mediated recently in the Middle East. The mediations adopted similar means but with contrasting results with the former settling and the latter not.

The workshop discussed the reasons for the success and the failure and explained why most mediations succeed.

EAST ANGLIA, UK

Success insights Branch Committee member and international commercial mediator,

exchange views. It was chaired by Hon Andrew Liao, the Vice-Chair of the Working Group on IP Trading, with 30 people attending.

Also in October, Robert Morgan FCIArb gave a talk to members on “Pathways to Arbitration under the Model Law in Hong Kong and Australia: Convergence, Divergence and Limitations”. Mr Morgan provided a thought-provoking insight comparing and contrasting various aspects of arbitration in Hong Kong and Australia.

In November, the Taipei Chapter co-hosted a seminar “Resolving disputes through international arbitration under the IPA” along with the Singapore Academy of Law. Houchih Kuo MCIArb, Chair of the Taipei Chapter and Lok Vi Ming SC FCIArb, Head of the China Desk of the Committee for the International Promotion of Singapore Law and President of the Singapore Law Society, delivered the opening remarks of the seminar (see also picture).

CYPRUS

October seminar The branch held a successful one-day international arbitration seminar in October called “A quick way to justice”, in association with the Cyprus Arbitration and Mediation Centre.

There were talks on investment treaty arbitration, multi-party arbitration, dispute resolution in GCC countries, enforcement under the New York Convention, techniques for controlling time and cost in international arbitration and many others.

In collaboration with the European Branch, Cyprus Branch also held its first training courses from 30 October to 1 November.

• For longer versions of branch news → www.ciarb.org/branch-news February 2014 | THERESOLVER

p15_branch news.indd 15

15

17/01/2014 15:27

CIArb NEWS DAS CONVENTION The invitation-only DAS convention, held in November last year, was a very successful event. More than 140 members and Fellows of CIArb attended, with delegates given the opportunity to engage in thoughtprovoking discussions on the future of alternative dispute resolution.

Keynote speaker Lord Justice Jackson made an impressive presentation on the need for cost-efficient and effective management of dispute resolution, specifically addressing the views of the courts and the use of ADR techniques.

The day was divided into three sessions, each facilitated by an expert panel. The first panel debate, chaired by Sir Anthony Colman FCIArb C. Arb, reviewed the current state of international arbitration with particular reference to issues of delay and cost. The three leading practitioners on the panel, John Tackaberry QC FCIArb, Alan Redfern FCIArb and Elizabeth Snodgrass, enlightened the audience on pertinent issues in the field.

The mediation panel chaired by Tim Hardy FCIArb, consisting of Jane Gunn FCIArb, David Owen QC FCIArb and Tony Willis FCIArb, deliberated the definition of success in mediation. The final session was dedicated to the subject of adjudication and its transition from the UK into international jurisdictions. Headed by John Redmond FCIArb C.Arb and supported by John Wright FCIArb, Peter Aeberli FCIArb C.Arb and Ken Salmon MCIArb, the panel addressed concerns surrounding the management and decision-making process of adjudication.

CIArb Director General Anthony Abrahams MCIArb welcomed more than 140 delegates

Among other pieces, delegates were treated to ‘Over the Rainbow’ from The Wizard of Oz

Registration was an opportunity to inform delegates about the wide variety of CIArb courses on offer

Delegates heard from speakers with a wealth of experience in alternative dispute resolution

Elizabeth Snodgrass spoke in the first panel debate on delay and cost in international arbitration arrbitration

Mediation panellist David Owen QC

John Tackaberry QC, Elizabeth h Snodgrass, Alan Redfern and chair Sir Anthony Colman

International members enjoy a coffee break

p16-17 DAs convention.indd 16

17/01/2014 12:45

Jane Gunn spoke on the mediation panel on the subject of how to define success

Mediation panellists: Tony Willis, David Owen QC, Jane Gunn and Tim Hardy

John Tackaberry QC spoke on international arbitration

Charles Brown FCIArb C.Arb

Lord Justice Jackson was the keynote speaker

The breaks offered delegates an opportunity for networking

John Wright spoke on decisionmaking in arbitration

Musicians helped to create a convivial atmosphere during breaks

Professor Adnan Amkhan Bayno FCIArb and then President Vinayak Pradhan FCIArb C.Arb Panellist Tony Willis

p16-17 DAs convention.indd 17

17/01/2014 12:46

WHAT’S ON

ONLINE

Further information on all professional training courses can be found at: → www.ciarb.org/course-finder Education Team • T + 44 (0)20 7421 7439 • F + 44 (0)20 7404 4023 • E education@ciarb.org

TRAINING COURSE

DATE

LOCATION

CPD POINTS

TOTAL FEE (incl. VAT)

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION Introduction to ADR

18 March

UK

5

£480

Introduction to ADR

13 May

UK

5

£480

Introduction to ADR

30 September

UK

5

£480

Introduction to Mediation

12 February

UK

5

£480

Module 1 Mediation

10, 11, 12, 13, 14 March

UK

30

£2,400

Module 2 Mediation

17 March

UK

6

£1,560

Module 4 Mediation

Open Entry

UK

0

£660

MEDIATION

ADJUDICATION Introduction to Construction Adjudication

5 March

UK

5

£480

Module 1 Law of Obligations and Civil Evidence

3 March

UK

25

£1,320

Module 2 Construction Adjudication

10 March

UK

18

£1,320

Accelerated Route to Membership

18 – 19 June

UK

6

£1,320

Accelerated Route towards Fellowship

9 -10 April

UK

15.5

£1,860

Introduction to Domestic Arbitration

3 April

UK

5

£480

Module 1 Law of Obligations and Civil Evidence

3 March

UK

25

£1,320

Module 4 Domestic Arbitration

31 March

UK

12

£1,320

Accelerated Route to Membership

24 – 25 February

UK

6

£1,320

Accelerated Route to Fellowship

26 – 27 March

UK

15.5

£1,860

Introduction to International Arbitration

21 February

Singapore

-

Contact Branch

Introduction to International Arbitration

25 February

Cyprus

-

Contact Branch

Introduction to International Arbitration

25 March

UK

5

£480

DOMESTIC ARBITRATION

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION

Introduction to International Arbitration

26 June

UK

5

£480

Module 1 Law of Obligations and Civil Evidence

3 March

UK

25

£1,320

Module 2 International Arbitration

10 March

UK

18

£1,320

Module 2 International Arbitration

10 March

Singapore

-

Contact Branch

Module 3 International Arbitration

10 March

UK

17.5

£1,860

Module 4 International Arbitration

31 March

UK

12

£1,320

Accelerated Route to Membership

24-25 February

Netherlands

-

€1,200

Accelerated Route to Membership

24 – 25 February

UK

6

£1,320

Accelerated Route to Membership

27 – 28 March

Singapore

-

Contact Branch

Accelerated Route to Fellowship

22 – 23 February

Ireland

-

Contact Branch

Accelerated Route to Fellowship

26 – 27 March

UK

15.5

£1,860

Accelerated Route to Fellowship

18 – 19 April

UAE

-

Contact Branch

Breaking Through the Ice

3 April, 14 July

UK

5

£199

Expert Witness

18 March, 3 July

UK

5

£240

Train the Trainer

18 March, 30 July

UK

5

£300

Maria Arpa’s Dialogue Road Map

20 – 21 May

UK

TBC

TBC

CAREER DEVELOPMENT COURSES

CIArb FLAGSHIP EVENTS Oxford Lecture, UK, 19 March. Fee: £40 (inc VAT) CIArb European Branch Conference, Poland, 25 April. Fee: TBC CIArb Evening Seminar, UK, 30 April. Fee: £40 (inc VAT) CIArb Members’ Lunch, UK, 13 May. Fee: £60 (inc VAT) CIArb Roebuck Lecture, UK, 15 May. Free to members More details can be found at: → www..ciarb.org/conferences

18

FEATURED COURSE Commercial Mediation Training and Accreditation Assessment 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 March, Assessment: 17 March This course is aimed at candidates who would like to: • become a CIArb Member and CIArb Accredited Mediator • use mediation skills in their current profession

• represent clients in mediation • improve their leadership skills The training not only gives candidates the right skill set, but also prepares them for building an independent ADR practice and is therefore suited to aspiring mediators, conflict resolution professionals, and arbitrators looking to broaden their ADR practice offering.

THERESOLVER | February 2014

p18 What's On_original.indd 18

17/01/2014 15:28

L O C AT I O N L O C AT I O N L O C AT I O N BORN IN LONDON. INSPIRED BY LONDON. RADISSON BLU EDWARDIAN, LONDON IS A DISTINCTIVE COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUAL HOTELS, INCLUDING 150 VERSATILE MEETING AND EVENT SPACES, IN ALL THE BEST PLACES. EACH WITH A SLEEK, CONTEMPORARY DESIGN AND DEDICATED SERVICE. A SURPRISING FUSION OF ENGLISH ECCENTRIC AND EUROPEAN COOL, IT’S A COSMOPOLITAN EXPERIENCE THAT STIMULATES AND RELAXES IN EQUAL MEASURE. DISCOVER BLU. IT’S VERY YOU.

OX FOR D S T - COVENT G AR DEN L E I C E S T E R S Q - H E AT H R O W B LOO M S B U RY - C A N A RY W H A R F SO U T H K EN S I N G TO N - F I T ZROV I A MARBLE ARCH - MANCHESTER GUILDFORD

HOTELS DESIGNED TO SAY YES! radissonblu-edwardian.com Part of Edwardian Group London

RES.01.14.019.indd 1

16/01/2014 15:57

Since the founding of MPG in 1996 we have been specialising in all aspects of financial, commercial and contractual services to the construction and property industry, and we remain particularly associated with our origins of mechanical and electrical services.

MPGQS is able to handle all the financial, commercial, contractual and engineering aspects of any Project from inception to completion and beyond.

QUANTITY SURVEYING: COST MANAGEMENT Cost Planning Estimating Preparation of Tender Documentation Risk Analysis Bills of Quantities Remeasurements Feasibility Studies Tender Analysis Contract Procurement Variation and Measurement Analysis Interim Valuation and Final Account Project Management Measure, Evaluate and Agree Contract Variations Preparation of Capital Allowance Claims

DISPUTE RESOLUTION MEP ENGINEERING

Design of Engineering Services Preparation of Specifications and Drawings Value Engineering Design Supervision Utilities Management HEAD OFFICE 6th Floor, 77 Gracechurch St, London EC3V 0AS Tel: +44 (0) 203 598 2506 Fax: +44 (0) 203 598 2507

RES.01.14.020.indd 1

PROJECTS OFFICE 2 Apsley Mills Cottage, London Rd, Apsley Hertfordshire HP3 9QU T: +44 (0) 1442 265068 F: +44 (0) 1442 262365

Commercial Management Claim Preparation Preparation and the Management of - Mediation - Adjudication - Arbitration - Litigation Retrospective Delay Analysis Expert Witness - Quantum Expert Report - Planning Expert Report Specialists in FIDIC, NEC and JCT Contracts Saudi Arabia Level 18 Al Faisaliah Tower King Fahad Highway Olaya District Riyadh Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Tel: +966 55 944 9186

QATAR OFFICE Old Airport 45, Ahmed Bin Hanbel St, Al Hilal, Doha, Qatar T: +974 77 099 734

17/01/2014 10:55